]]>U.S. intelligence officials were frustrated with the Obama administration's response to Russia's cyber espionage and disinformation campaigns to disrupt Western democracies, arguing the administration's reluctance to respond more forcefully stemmed from fear of Russian retaliation.

More than a dozen current and former national security officials from across the government toldPolitico how ineffective the White House and key agencies were in authorizing counter measures against Russian interference. Those officials said that responses such as shutting down suspected Russian intelligence sites or taking counter-intelligence action never went anywhere due to administrative roadblocks.

"[Intelligence officials] had a list of things they could never get the signoffs on," one official said. "The truth is, nobody wanted to piss off the Russians."

Wanting to counter suspected Russian interference in American politics, these officials said that the Obama administration was aware of Russia's activities but did not want to retaliate forcefully. As it became clear that Russia was meddling in the 2016 election, officials recommended expelling diplomats or striking back through cyber measures but were denied.

Some outside the White House blamed the National Security Council's micromanagement, but NSC officials pointed the finger at the State and Defense Departments. Those agencies were reportedly afraid of Russian retaliation.

"The frustrations [about lack of forceful action] are justified and, frankly, were shared by the White House," a former official told Politico. "The options were being discussed. They weren't being implemented."

The Obama administration as early as 2014 received several warnings that Moscow was intensifying its intelligence operations to disrupt the U.S. political system and other Western democracies, Politico reported Monday, citing more than half a dozen current and former officials. The NSC, intelligence agencies, and the State Department received reports of Russia stepping up its operations after the Kremlin's cyber attack against Ukrainian election systems in 2014.

To some government officials, the administration was too dismissive that Russia posed a threat to the U.S.

"Even if the Russians and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin had these ambitions, they were doubtful of their capacity to execute them," one official said of the Obama administration.

Others were concerned about the prospect of Russia testing the U.S.

"We were worried [Putin] would try to test us," a former Obama administration official said. Another official described the reports of Russian plans as "alarming," adding that they were "extraordinary about the extent of the threat and the capacities the Russians were building."

Ned Price, a former spokesman for the NSC under Obama, denied that the White House was reluctant to act and feared retaliation from Putin.

"The Obama administration was nothing but proactive in responding to Russian aggression in all of its forms, especially as Moscow became more brazen with and following its military moves against Ukraine beginning in 2014," Price said, referring to sanctions and support for NATO.

In the summer of 2016, the administration considered doing even more, assembling a list of options but ultimately choosing inaction. One former NSC official blamed the lack of a response on pushback from several national security agencies that feared retaliation.

"Any of these actions risked a Russian reciprocation," the former official said. "We were kind of caught in a catch-22."

]]>http://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-obama-admin-feared-retaliation-if-responded-russian-cyber-attacks/feed/0Obama Plans to Return to Politics, Help Democrats in a ‘Delicate Dance’http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-plans-to-re-emerge-on-political-scene/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-plans-to-re-emerge-on-political-scene/#respondFri, 11 Aug 2017 13:32:51 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=832534Former President Barack Obama will publicly reemerge on a national scale this fall in an effort to help the Democratic Party, but the move is worrying some strategists.

]]>Former President Barack Obama will publicly reemerge on a national scale this fall in an effort to help the Democratic Party, but the move is worrying some strategists.

An Obama aide told the Hill this will be the beginning of a "delicate dance" that aims to cast Obama in the public eye but prevent him from remaining the face of the Democratic Party.

Close advisers to Obama say he plans to take on a proactive role in helping his party rebuild. Since leaving office, Obama has done fundraising for the Democratic National Committee and National Democratic Redistricting Committee, and has also provided guidance to DNC chairman Tom Perez and lawmakers.

But some critics worry his return to the spotlight will risk bolstering Republican competition.

"He has to be careful," said Julian Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. "At a moment when President Trump’s approval is falling so fast—including with his base—there is a risk for Obama taking center stage and triggering the energy that many Republicans currently lack."

Cal Jillson, professor of political science at Southern Methodist University, said Trump would revel in Obama's reemergence and use the former president as a target to "direct his fury." This would allow Obama to make room for someone else in the Democratic Party to take the helm, Jillson told the Hill.

"[Obama will] tread lightly because he is not going to be the face of the party when it actually counts in 2020 and 2024," Jillson said. "So the extent to which he would emerge and speak to a wide range of issues would preclude the emergence of someone else. They must find a standard bearer for future elections and I think he can at least in the short term suck up all the available oxygen."

However, one Democratic strategist said Obama and Hillary Clinton should both "hang back at this point" so the party could rebound. Some party members are worried that Clinton and Obama's presence could give the appearance of looking backward, the Hill reported.

"We already lack a party leader, we lack a vision, we lack an identity," the strategist said. "We can’t remain stuck in the past."

"Pundits are always going to overthink and overanalyze the pros and cons of having a former president on the campaign trail, but the truth is, there’s little downside," said Democratic strategist David Wade.

"He has unique convening powers to draw a crowd, energize Democrats, make a closing argument, and then it is up to candidates to close the deal," he said.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-plans-to-re-emerge-on-political-scene/feed/0Blumenthal: N. Korean Cyber Attack on Sony ‘Should Have Prompted a More Aggressive Response’ From Obama Admin.http://freebeacon.com/national-security/blumenthal-n-korean-cyber-attack-sony-prompted-aggressive-response-obama-admin/
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/blumenthal-n-korean-cyber-attack-sony-prompted-aggressive-response-obama-admin/#respondThu, 10 Aug 2017 17:22:40 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=831952The post Blumenthal: N. Korean Cyber Attack on Sony ‘Should Have Prompted a More Aggressive Response’ From Obama Admin. appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
]]>Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.) told MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell on Thursday that the Obama administration should have responded more aggressively to North Korea in November 2014 after the country reportedly waged a cyber attack against Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Mitchell asked Blumenthal how concerned he was about North Korea's cyber capabilities as another weapon of choice that could be used against the United States.

"Very deeply concerned and that is a great question, Andrea, that very often is ignored," Blumenthal said. "The cyber capabilities of the North Koreans and many of our adversaries are well beyond what the public understands."

He went on to say that some military leaders who have briefed the Senate Armed Services Committee have said the greatest threat from North Korea is cyber, and that the U.S. government needs to ensure building cyber defenses is a priority.

"Sen. [John] McCain (R., Ariz.), the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and I have repeatedly raised with officials of this administration and of past administrations the lack of clear policies to define what is an act of war that will prompt the kind of response that we need to do," Blumenthal said.

He emphasized this point by pointing to the North Korean attack on Sony and how the Obama administration was not aggressive enough.

"The attack on Sony by North Koreans reportedly perhaps should have prompted a more aggressive response by the Obama administration if there were a defined policy about what constitutes an act of war," Blumenthal said.

Trump delivered a strong warning Tuesday against North Korea if the rogue country makes any future threats against the United States.

"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States," Trump said. "They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen."

]]>http://freebeacon.com/national-security/blumenthal-n-korean-cyber-attack-sony-prompted-aggressive-response-obama-admin/feed/0Obama Donors Will Not Financially Commit to Biden Presidential Bidhttp://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-donors-will-not-financially-commit-biden-presidential-bid/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-donors-will-not-financially-commit-biden-presidential-bid/#respondWed, 09 Aug 2017 13:18:59 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=830338Former President Barack Obama's major donors are not committing their financial support to former Vice President Joe Biden for a 2020 presidential run.

]]>Former President Barack Obama's major donors are not committing their financial support to former Vice President Joe Biden for a 2020 presidential run.

The Hillcontacted more than 10 top Obama donors, all of whom are signaling that Biden cannot depend on their support and they are looking for a fresher face to run against President Donald Trump in 2020.

One former Obama donor said that Biden had over 40 years of experience in Washington, and another said that is exactly the opposite of what the Democratic Party "wants right now."

"There are some who love Joe and have a lot of respect for him but want a whole new face for the party and want an aspirational voice," an Obama-Biden donor said. Another donor said that they all had to be "realistic and strategic, not emotional," and they cannot support a candidate simply out of obligation.

Another issue donors have with Biden is he will be 77 when the next presidential race comes around. Many progressives are hopeful that Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) will run, but donors worry about Sanders' age on the trail as well—he'll be 78 in 2020. Donors also fear that Warren will not be able to appeal to centrists.

Biden has not officially said whether he intends to run for president, but with his book coming out next month and his campaign-style speeches in New Hampshire and other states, allies say this could be a barometer for his presidential run.

Donors indicated that the "fresh face" they are looking for could be Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.). She appeared in the Hamptons in late June to meet with top donors.

After attending this event, many donors felt that she would seek higher office and even Obama aides say she "fits the bill as a face for the party's future," the Hill reported.

"Kamala has come to embody what's next for our party," said former Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt.

Biden had trouble with fundraising and donors in 2016 when he was considering whether to run in the Democratic primary following his son's death. He knew many donors had already committed their support to Hillary Clinton.

The former vice president may find himself in the same predicament this time around.

"I hate to say it, because I love Joe, but some feel he's yesterday's news," a donor said.

"Elections are about the future not the past," another Obama donor said.

A Morning Consult/Politico poll release in June concluded that 74 percent of Democrats viewed Biden favorably.

]]>An unofficial shadow office "stocked with Obama loyalists" is quietly working in Washington, D.C. to carry out the previous administration's science agenda.

The group of science experts who left the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) after President Donald Trump took office "is informal yet organized," according to a report from the health-oriented news website Stat.

Members of the new group—which numbers in the dozens—have provided counsel to Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill, consulted with scientific societies, and have held group-wide strategy sessions, according to Stat. They have also helped analyze the impact of White House budget proposals and policies, including the decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.

The former officials have remained engaged out of a so-called "sense of necessity," according to Stat. They view Trump as a threat to science, a stark contrast from the self-described "science geek," former President Barack Obama.

"There was no chance that this team was going to go work only in Silicon Valley or for lobbying firms," a former staffer told Stat. "A lot of people feel a sense of personal responsibility to use what we learned for the greater good at a time when the federal government is averse to things we think are really important."

The group's members see themselves as the true purveyors of science in the face of the new administration waging what "feels like a frontal attack" on science, according to Stat. Tom Kalil, a former deputy director for technology and innovation at OSTP and a top science and technology adviser on former President Bill Clinton's National Economic Council, argued how disagreeing with the Trump administration goes beyond partisan policy disagreements.

"I think there are just more instances in which there seems to be a willful disregard for the facts," Kalil said.

The former OSTP staffers said they are "simply worried about the future of science policy," noting Trump's proposed budget cuts,Stat reported.

The former Obama officials see Trump's lack of action in regard to OSTP staffing as especially harmful, according to Stat:

Roughly 100 staff members from the Obama administration have left OSTP since January. The Trump administration has added only "about 10 new members" since then, according to an administration official who was not authorized to speak on the record.

Even once a planned OSTP expansion is complete, the office will have roughly 60 employees, equivalent to its size under former President George W. Bush but a far cry from the 135 or so employed as recently as December.

Trump's approach to OSTP contrasts with the Obama White House, an office that announced it would appoint John Holdren as OSTP director and special assistant to the president for science in December 2008, a month before Obama even took office.

In contrast, Trump has not appointed a top science adviser.

The Trump administration argues it is approaching scientific issues differently than the Obama administration. A Trump administration official said the office has received less attention because other "power centers" in the administration have emerged to lessen its role, especially on the technology side. Those centers include the Office of American Innovation, led by Jared Kushner, and 18F, the startup-inspired wing of the General Services Administration.

At the same time, the administration has taken steps to restaff OSTP. Michael Kratsios was hired as deputy chief technology officer. Kratsios previously served as chief of staff to Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley mogul who helped select Trump's health staff during the transition. Sean Bonyun, a former communications staffer for Rep. Fred Upton (R., Mich.) and the House Energy and Commerce Committee, was brought in as legislative lead.

In July, an OSTP official said there were 35 employees in OSTP, and 12 employees in the department's science division, the Hillreported. The official said the division is organized and divided differently under the Trump administration compared to the Obama administration.

The approach would be consistent with the Trump administration's vocal efforts to reduce waste and inefficiencies in the federal government.

Nonetheless, the different approach has not quelled the fears of former OSTP staffers. They will reportedly continue to operate quietly to further Obama-era policies.

There are ethical and legal restrictions over what former science officials can do, and many former staffers are wary of making too big a splash, Stat reported.

"I've tried to keep a low profile in terms of my volunteer policy work," said one former OSTP official who spoke to Stat on the condition of anonymity. "If I'm advocating for something as a former Obama official, it might not be particularly effective."

]]>http://freebeacon.com/politics/former-obama-officials-operate-shadow-network-to-push-science-agenda/feed/08 of 10 Most Fact-Checked Politicians by PolitiFact Are Republicanshttp://freebeacon.com/politics/8-of-10-most-fact-checked-politicians-by-politifact-republicans/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/8-of-10-most-fact-checked-politicians-by-politifact-republicans/#respondMon, 07 Aug 2017 16:01:50 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=828661Eight of the top 10 most fact-checked politicians by PolitiFact over the past decade are Republicans, according to the site's own records.

Not surprisingly, the top four most fact-checked figures were the presidential candidates of the major parties in 2012 and 2016: Obama (630 claims checked as of July 31), President Donald Trump (442), 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton (302), and 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney (221).

All of those men, except Scott, ran for president in the last three election cycles.

The fact-checking site rates claims by public figures on a scale ranging from "True" to "Pants on Fire," with ratings in-between like "False," "Mostly False," "Half-True," and "Mostly True." It also calls out politicians who flip-flop on issues.

More than 70 percent of Obama and Clinton claims were deemed to be "Half-True" or better.

Classic. Top ten PolitiFact subjects…eight are Republicans, and Obama and Hillary are larded up with "True" and "Mostly True" rulings. https://t.co/g9Usb5UvTw

PolitiFact has faced charges of bias for its ratings and selections of clips to fact-check. An analysis by the conservative site The Federalist found its rating system to be skewed in favor of finding Democrats more truthful and Republicans more deceitful.

In 2012, the site rated Obama's claim about Obamacare "if you like your health care plan, you will keep your health care plan" as "Half-True." By 2013, however, it had named that same statement its "Lie Of the Year."

PolitiFact earlier this yearretracted its "Mostly True" ruling from 2014 for then-Secretary of State John Kerry saying the U.S. had removed "100 percent" of Syria's chemical weapons, after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gassed his own people again.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/politics/8-of-10-most-fact-checked-politicians-by-politifact-republicans/feed/0Fmr. Obama State Dept. Spokesman: Trump Holding Russia ‘Accountable’ by Signing Sanctions Billhttp://freebeacon.com/national-security/fmr-obama-state-dept-spokesman-trump-holding-putin-accountable-signing-sanctions-bill/
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/fmr-obama-state-dept-spokesman-trump-holding-putin-accountable-signing-sanctions-bill/#respondThu, 03 Aug 2017 18:04:39 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=826912The post Fmr. Obama State Dept. Spokesman: Trump Holding Russia ‘Accountable’ by Signing Sanctions Bill appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
]]>John Kirby, the former State Department spokesman during the Obama administration, said Wednesday on CNN that President Donald Trump is holding the Russian government "accountable" by signing the sanctions bill against Russia.

Host Brooke Baldwin asked Kirby what he thought about Trump's delay in signing the bipartisan bill and the president's fears that the legislation encroachs on the executive branch's powers.

"Well, you talked about support from Congress on this. I think he obviously would consider it unwelcome support. This is not a bill that I think he was all that interested in signing for a myriad of reasons," Kirby said.

Kirby added that he would like to believe that the delay in approving the sanctions was because he had his lawyers looking over the authorities in the bill, so he could make a legal case for why it was flawed in that regard.

"If [Trump] signed this bill, to me, that was proof enough in my mind that he was willing to hold Russia accountable, so I’m glad he signed it," said Kirby, a retired admiral.

"I understand the concern over his executive authority and I hope that that's really the limit of his concerns over this and that we can move past all this and continue to hold [Russian President Vladimir] Putin accountable," Kirby continued.

Trump signed the Russia sanctions bill on Wednesday behind closed doors and released a statement explaining his concern over the bill, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

The bill was passed with a vote of 419-3 in the House, and 98-2 in the Senate, making it likely that a veto from Trump would have been overturned.

The bill places sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea, and gives Congress the power of blocking the president from lifting them. Experts say that the goal of the Russia sanctions is to make it more difficult for Russia to export weapons, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The bill will also prevent Trump from lifting Obama administration-era sanctions on Russia, which were responding to the Russian government's aggression in Ukraine and meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. If Trump intended to cut down on Russia sanctions, he would need approval from Congress.

The bill was originally created to target Iran and North Korea's ability and efforts to drop missiles, but Russia was added in later.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/national-security/fmr-obama-state-dept-spokesman-trump-holding-putin-accountable-signing-sanctions-bill/feed/0Potential 2020 Dem Presidential Candidate: Democrats Can’t Just Be Anti-Trump, Must Have ‘Alternative Vision’http://freebeacon.com/politics/potential-2020-dem-candidate-democrats-cant-just-be-anti-trump/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/potential-2020-dem-candidate-democrats-cant-just-be-anti-trump/#respondWed, 02 Aug 2017 17:14:00 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=826015The post Potential 2020 Dem Presidential Candidate: Democrats Can’t Just Be Anti-Trump, Must Have ‘Alternative Vision’ appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
]]>Former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D.) said Tuesday on Politico‘s "Off Message" podcast that whoever the Democratic presidential nominee is in 2020 should not just be anti-Trump, but must offer an "alternative vision."

Politico correspondent Edward-Isaac Dovere asked Patrick, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, what the argument against President Donald Trump will be for the Democratic Party's future 2020 nominee.

"I hope that for the nominee that isn't the question," Patrick responded. "Meaning I think we can't be just about what we're against. We have to be about what we're for."

"I think offering an alternative vision for the future of this country and the role of government alongside the private sector, alongside philanthropy, alongside individuals exercising their free creativity, is enormously important," Patrick continued.

Patrick concluded by saying he is optimistic that the Democrats could offer an alternative vision and that they must do so to win.

Several top aides to former President Barack Obama are encouraging Patrick behind the scenes to run for president in 2020, the Washington Free Beaconreported.

Patrick has had meetings with former Obama strategist David Axelrod, who has even devised a political plan for Patrick to be able to win the White House, Politico reported Tuesday.

Obama friend and former top adviser Valerie Jarrett said that "my heart desires" a President Patrick.

Patrick's former deputy chief of staff, David Simas, who also served as Obama's political director in the White House, has encouraged Patrick to seriously consider running in 2020.

]]>Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R.) in a Tuesday op-ed accused liberals of "trying to mess with Texas" by spending George Soros' money on redistricting efforts.

Writing in theWashington Examiner, Abbott argued that Democrats are planning to spend millions of dollars on elections. That money will go towards recovering from losing the 2016 presidential election, as well as a decade of losing at the state level, by focusing on state races and the coming congressional redistricting in 2021.

Republicans run the majority in both the House and Senate and are also the majority in both chambers in 32 states. There are also 33 states run by Republican governors. Democrats lost 12 governorships, nine Senate and 62 House seats, and more than 900 state legislative seats during Barack Obama's eight years in the White House.

But that balance of power could turn towards the Democratic end of the spectrum if Democrats control the state legislatures and other partisan bodies which decide how to redistrict the House of Representatives and Electoral College in 2021, in order to represent changing population differences between states. This Abbott expects to benefit "booming conservative states such as Texas."

Abbott sees redistricting threatened by a self-identified "super group", including former President Barack Obama and other top Democrats, with a main goal of reinstating House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif) as speaker. The tax-exempt PAC is headed by former Attorney General Eric Holder and, according to Abbott, aims to "fund astroturfed ballot initiatives in the guise of ‘fairness.'"

This project is also aided by notorious Democratic donor George Soros. Abbott wrote that Soros has used his money to influence and meddle into elections in the past, including an instance in 2016 when he spent $11 million on local district attorney races.

"The Soros network has their sights set on re-drawing congressional districts in the Lone Star State to push their progressive agenda and turn the Texas dream into a California nightmare," Abbott wrote.

It is because of liberals like Soros and Pelosi's backers that Abbott is running for reelection as governor in 2018.

"I'm running for re-election to make sure that San Francisco liberals such as Pelosi will not be running our great state. I'm committed to preserving Texas' liberty. And I will continue to fight back against the liberal agenda that threatens the future of our nation," he wrote.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/politics/abbott-soros-democrats-buy-power/feed/0Obama’s Inner Circle Pushing Former Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick to Run for Presidenthttp://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-inner-circle-pushing-deval-patrick-run-president/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-inner-circle-pushing-deval-patrick-run-president/#respondTue, 01 Aug 2017 14:56:32 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=824752Several top aides to former President Barack Obama are encouraging former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D.) to run for president in 2020.

]]>Several top aides to former President Barack Obama are encouraging former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D.) to run for president in 2020.

Patrick has had meetings with former Obama strategist David Axelrod, who has even devised a political plan for Patrick to be able to win the White House, Politicoreported Tuesday.

Obama friend and former top adviser Valerie Jarrett said that "my heart desires" a President Patrick.

Patrick's former deputy chief of staff, David Simas, who also served as Obama's political director in the White House, has encouraged Patrick to seriously consider running in 2020.

Patrick himself is not so sure about a presidential run, however.

"I'm trying to think about how to be helpful, because I care about the country, and I'm a patriot first," Patrick told Politico. "It's way, way too soon to be making plans for 2020."

"So I'll just leave it at that," he added.

If Patrick does decide to run, he could encounter problems from many Democrats who are opposed to Wall Street and the financial industry. Patrick currently works for Bain Capital, the same firm started by Obama's 2012 Republican opponent, Mitt Romney.